It is about time that this 40 per cent expenses for the sweepstakes was put into some sort of perspective. The only form of perspective has been a perspective relating to the previous operation of the sweepstake which is limited to circumstances and we are now increasing in this section that figure from 30 per cent to 40 per cent. This is not a 10 per cent increase, but a 33? per cent increase on the original figure.
If I wanted to be unfair I would contrast this 40 per cent collection costs with that of the Revenue Commissioners, whose collection costs run approximately at 1 per cent or 2 per cent of the total moneys they collect. Naturally, this is not comparable with the operations of the sweepstakes because the Revenue Commissioners are collecting moneys statutorily due by people to the State. When we talk about sweepstakes we are talking basically of the raising of money for charitable purposes. This is what the whole operation is allegedly about. We have the extraordinary situation now where we are paying 40 per cent of the total money to collect the remaining 60 per cent. Any self-respecting charitable organisation that has collections and administration expenses of 40 per cent would in any other country of the world be laughed out of court.
Organisations like Oxfam, War on Want and Concern have over long periods raised substantial amounts of money for charity without involving themselves in administration or collection expenses on anything remotely like the scale that we are now sanctioning in this Bill. In fact, generally speaking with regard to charitable organisations, the keenest attention is paid to the ratio between collection and administration costs on the one hand and the total amount raised for charity on the other. Heads have been known to roll in these organisations if the level rises too high.
I am not familiar with the latest figure but I would be very surprised if the collection and administration expenses for organisations like Oxfam go above 10 per cent or 12 per cent. I know that six or seven years ago when I investigated the situation myself they were running at about 8 per cent. On the face of it we are sanctioning an amount which is three to four times what it costs any other voluntary agency to collect money for charity. Indeed, even when the ratio was 30 per cent the sweep—alone among charitable organisations—was perculiarly immune from the sort of criticism justifiably levelled at other charitable organisations when collection or administration expenses rose above 7 per cent or 8 per cent. We must ask why the Sweep, alone among charitable organisations, needs such a huge proportion of its money to be spent on collection and administration.
I am alarmed to hear that the real reason for the Bill is because the receipts have dropped. If receipts have dropped and if expenses are remaining at the same level, it says something very unhappy about the organisation. It implies, perhaps, that people are being paid for doing nothing, that people are being paid whether or not they actually sell any tickets. I suspect there are two main reasons why the expense ratio is so high: the practice of paying commission to the sellers of tickets and also perhaps the reasons relating to the illegalities which have been mentioned earlier on. It is extraordinary that we have a situation in which a management fee is paid to people who on the face of it are not managing this charitable organisation even a third or a quarter as efficiently as many other charitable organisations.
There is one particular point of detail which I should like the Minister to answer and that is in relation to subsection (b), which states that:
Where payment is made to a person promoting such sweepstakes that payment shall be deemed for the purposes of this Act to be part of the expenses of holding such sweepstake.
Am I correct in thinking that "a person" in this subsection includes the limited company and does not refer to tax payments which might be made to persons other than the limited company which is, in fact, a promoting company? If I am correct, perhaps (b) effectively refers to the organisation and management fee and the effect of the subsection is to ensure the organisation and management fee is to be computed within the 40 per, cent to which the figure is being allowed to increase. I would like an assurance from the Minister that payments under (b) do not include cash payments which may be made to individuals either inside or outside the jurisdiction simply for promoting such sweepstakes regardless of the degree to which such promotion produces cash returns.
